ELECTION 2014 - Merged Threads

[DavieD55]

So all whining aside, where's the best place to keep an eye on the state house numbers? 9news has a lot of the results posted - how many 2014 house seats did we have to win to make the majority?

5


http://www.bing.com/search?q=Colorad...17c60fbf73875c

[.455_Hunter]

From KMGH.com:

Hickenlooper will have to team with a state legislature that will be run by the Republicans.

No reason not to make him squirm with a host of pro-gun bills...

[Superorb]

I live in Thornton, so yes, I am in Denver every week and Boulder once a month. Boulder and Denver together have far fewer registered Democrats than two counties combined in Maryland. Colorado hasn't shown a tenth the ability to commit machine politics voter fraud that Illinois has been the pioneer for, and Massachusetts sent Ted "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy back to the US Senate for a total of 47 years. I refuse to believe that the Democratic Party has taken hold of Colorado to the same extant as those three bastions of Democratic Party fiefdom.

But they certainly condone illegals voting. Last election I was behind a couple who spoke Spanish, had no ID, and the poll worker confirmed they were not registered to vote in Adams county (or anywhere most likely). Yet they still allowed them to vote. Meanwhile, wife and I had to fill out a paper ballot that were both never counted according to the tracking numbers. Something about us getting mail in ballots and not sending them in.

[Superorb]

No reason not to make him squirm with a host of pro-gun bills...

But there's no reason for him to sign any of the bills that come across his desk. The buck stops with Hick, and he can easily veto to placate his agenda and those who pull his strings.

[RblDiver]

Would love for the CO legislature to also run some voter ID laws past his desk, see him reject it and be in favor of illegal voting.

[avandelay]

But there's no reason for him to sign any of the bills that come across his desk. The buck stops with Hick, and he can easily veto to placate his agenda and those who pull his strings.

We'll just give them the name of 'Common Sense, non-extreme Mag Ban Fix' and 'Denver/Boulder Fracking Ban' and add the repeal of the two bad gun laws as amendments.

[hurley842002]

For those perpetually whining about wanting a third viable candidate on a ballot.

I have to question if you are incapable of doing fractional math.

Lets say you have an election. Lets simplify it, and say you have three basic issues that people care about. X, Y, and Z.

Now, lets take a two viable candidates, 1, and 2.



Now, lets take a three candidate system.



Why? Because viewpoints are not divided on thirds. Two candidates will be politically close in the spectrum. When that happens, neither can prevail. If people can't understand that, I'm not going to try to explain it further. This is about as easy of a concept as the whole "guns aren't going to spontaniously kill people by themselves". Nonetheless, perpetual whining.

If you want to have a VIABLE election, work within one of the existing parties to get the candidate of your choice. If you want to guarantee a win for a minority opinion candidate, well then, by all means, get your third candidate on the ballot so the winner will ALWAYS be what you don't want. But hell, at least you can have a chip on your back for (unsuccessfully) always voting for your guy.

It's not a matter of "oh the R would have to try harder to overcome the.....". When you have a solid 40% moonbat-lets-be-socialists-and-give-me-welfare-vote, if you add a "viable" third party candidate to that? No matter what utopian imagination you have, neither candidate would ever exceed 40% of the vote to overcome the moonbats. And the moonbats will never "splinter" off. Libertarians, conservatives, etc., they are all viewed as the "enemy".

So, you get a chip on your shoulder for voting for your guy, while in fact, guaranteeing a win for "moonbat socialism" every go around if your "wish" is granted. I live in a place called REALITY. I don't chase dreams that are utopic, unfounded in reality or logic. A "third" party candidate is that utopic, illogical, unrealistic dream. The reality is, if you ever get it, you've succeeded in shooting yourself in the foot, nothing more.

Work to get who you want nominated. Quit bitching and talking about a happy perfect word where food grows itself, money rains from the sky, and third party candidates can be elected.

That is all.

It's no use Fox, their hearts are bigger than your logic...

[MED]

OK, I feel better...my new pistol upper was just dropped off at the door

[rbeau30]

But there's no reason for him to sign any of the bills that come across his desk. The buck stops with Hick, and he can easily veto to placate his agenda and those who pull his strings.

Then he can veto enough bills to get himself recalled. and with the race as close as it is now I think that is a good possibility if he starts doing things that Coloradoans dislike.

[TFOGGER]

Nonetheless, there will always be Cubs fans, no matter how bad the team is. Some of the third party thing has to be a martyr complex. The only viable way to get a libertarian into office under the current system is to "sneak" them in disguised as a Republican or Democrat, because too many voters vote on autopilot. I wonder: How different would our elections be if the voters had to write in the name of the person they wanted to elect? Or even if the ballots had no information about party affiliation on them?